FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 33539/05
Sergey Nikolayevich SOBAKAR against Russia
and 3 other applications
(see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3 July 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Julia Laffranque, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on various dates listed in the appendix,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants are four Russian nationals. Their names, dates of birth and places of residence are tabulated in the appendix. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
The applicants complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about non-enforcement of the final domestic court judgments granting their claims against municipal unitary enterprises, commercial companies enjoying the right of economic control over its property. A list of the respective domestic judgments is set out in the appendix.
On 20 May 2011 the Court communicated the applicants’ complaints to the respondent Government under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court.
By letters of 21 September 2011 the applicants were invited to submit, by 23 November 2011, their comments on the Government’s observations, together with any claims for just satisfaction. The applicants did not reply.
By letters dated 20 January 2012 sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired on 23 November 2011 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicants do not intend to pursue the application. No responses followed.
THE LAW
1. Given that the applications at hand concern similar complaints and raise identical issues under the Convention, the Court decides to consider them in a single decision.
2. Having regard to the correspondence with the applicants, the Court finds that they may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the cases.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
André WampachPeer Lorenzen
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Appendix
No
Application No
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of birth
Place of residence
Final domestic judgments (dates, courts)
33539/05
23/08/2005
Sergey Nikolayevich SOBAKAR
19/06/1956
Miass
17/02/2004 and 04/03/2005, Justice of the Peace of the 30th Court Circuit of the Tavricheskiy District of the Omsk Region;
05/08/2004; Justice of the Peace of the 29th Court Circuit of the Tavricheskiy District
42460/05
30/09/2005
Olga Nikolayevna VLADYKA
28/05/1955
Petrozavodsk
14/04/2004; Petrozavodsk Town Court of the Karelia Republic
13691/09
04/01/2009
Natalya Borisovna LOBOVA
09/05/1966
Belgorod
17/08/2004; Oktyabrskiy District Court of Belgorod, the Belgorod Region
65268/09
22/11/2009
Valentina Leontyevna BELIKOVA
10/11/1946
Paratunka
12/02/2009; Elizovskiy District Court of the Kamchatka Region
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy